CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at University Care 3
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, appropriate safeguarding arrangements and medicines given at the right dose and time. Infection prevention measures were also in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's physical, mental health and social needs were assessed. Staff had induction and ongoing training, and people were supported with food, healthcare, dental care and lawful decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people well and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in care decisions and their choices were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised, detailed and updated when needs changed. People could choose activities, access education and raise complaints in accessible ways.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager used quality checks, feedback and action plans to improve the service. Inspectors found an inclusive culture and appropriate partnership working with health and social care professionals.
What inspectors found, December 2021
University Care 3 rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support with strong management oversight.
This was the first inspection since the home registered. One inspector visited on 28 October 2021, spoke with one person and four staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
Inspectors rated all five areas Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. They found enough staff, safe medicine systems, suitable training, personalised care and respectful support.
People were involved in decisions about their care and were supported to build independence, access healthcare, take part in activities and use advocacy services. The home also had systems to learn from incidents and improve care.
The home had previously experienced concerns about admissions and compatibility. The manager changed the admission process and care planning, and inspectors said these changes had reduced incidents. This was the home's first inspection, so there was no earlier CQC rating to compare.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs safely. Medicines were stored and given safely, with records explaining allergies and personal preferences.
“The system for managing medicines ensured people were given the right dose at the right time.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's individual needs, preferences and communication methods. They were updated when people's needs changed.
“People received personalised care and support shaped on their needs and preferences.” from the report
Respect and choice
People were involved in decisions about their care and staff respected their privacy, dignity and choices.
“People were always treated with dignity and respect.” from the report
Improving leadership
The home used feedback, quality checks and action plans to improve care. Staff and people were encouraged to share their views.
“Quality checks were in place and consistently completed.” from the report
Previous compatibility incidents
minorHistorical concerns about admissions and whether people were compatible had led to incidents. The home introduced a new admission process and inspectors said the incidents were not repeated.
“Following incidents surrounding admissions into the service the registered manager had implemented a new admission process to ensure people who lived at the service were compatible.” from the report
- 01How do you assess whether a new resident will be compatible with the people already living here?
- 02How often are care plans reviewed, and what happens when someone's needs or goals change?
- 03How do you support each person to develop independence and take part in activities or education?
- 04How can residents and families raise concerns, and how will we be told what action was taken?
- 05How do you check that medicines are given at the right time and in the way each person prefers?
This was the first planned inspection of the newly registered home and covered all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 December 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of University Care 3
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- December 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 September 2020.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.